These guys have taken a lot of hits from the Dershowitz's and the usual crowd of academic defenders of Israel as well those too intimidated to go against the consensus. I think the big deal was that they came from such prestigiuous backgrounds. I have scanned the book for a couple of hours, but don't remember much. It seemed pretty straight forward, just very detailed, well foot noted and hard to rebut for the usual suspects. The authors have unassailable academic positions which helped. It is sort of like when the lobby called Jimmy Carter an anti-semite, plagiarist, and it did did not stick as his reputation was too well known.
Here's an encouraging sign on the type of actions that can help Israel do what it needs to do. The tide is turning. ******** buzzes buzz itHistoric Israeli divestment bill vetoed six days later: Naomi Klein www.rabble.ca/columnists/2010/04/historic-israeli-divestment... sent by bloozguy since 15 hours 39 minutes, published about 25 minutes "The historic bill resolves to divest ASUC's assets from two American companies, General Electric and United Technologies, that are "materially and militarily supporting the Israeli government's occupation of the Palestinian territories" -- and to advocate that the UC, with about $135 million invested in companies that profit from Israel's illegal actions in the Occupied Territories, follow suit. Although the bill passed by a vote of 16-4 after a packed and intense debate, the President of the Senate vetoed the bill six days later. The Senate is expected to reconsider the bill soon; groups such as Jewish Voice for Peace are asking supporters of the bill to send letters to the Senators, who can overturn the veto with only 14 votes." http://www.buzzflash.net/story.php?id=1085639
Harsh language, but in the end what he is calling for is perfectly justified. If the US is serious about peace in that region, their military aid to Israel and any others engaged in armed conflict should also stop.
To stop completely would not be fair I think. Syria, Russia and Iran seem to be arming the other side. Something must be done to try to bring arms to the minimum level while not creating an imbalance. Zero would be nice, but not sure if it's practical, not from an aggressor standpoint, but from a mental security standpoint.
Is there not a tremendous imbalance as is, which the US is contributing to with its military aid? What is the comparison between the arms the US supplies Israel on an annual basis and what its adversaries are receiving from the countries you mention, taken together?
I see what you're saying. That's true. I assumed stopping aid meant withdrawing the current inventory as well.
Oh so because they had to go trough the terrible things in the 40's they can do whatever they want to others? of course it is terrible what happened in WW2. but that does not excuse Israel of the things they do (the same goes for the Palestinians). Furthermore The support of the US has nothing to do with the WW2. Anybody who believes this is very naive. It has to do with money.
Gaza is more and more reminsicient of the Warsaw Ghetto. I assume the Nazis did not allow shoes in either. I wonder how the Jews cannot see the similarity.
support israel because of that to prevent that? this is an amazing view point, A man whose parents were in the Holocaust training camps talks about how absurd the idea is to support Israel because of that, and says if anything because of that we should know how it feels and be outraged that we are now doing something similar, unjust, and inhumane to others after experiencing things like this first hand http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=A5drXEXkf9s another man whose mother and grandmother was shot dead in the holocaust says my parent's did not die so that we could do similar things to others: http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=qMGuYjt6CP8
I would not disagree with your relatives and personally think current Israeli policies are horrid. That would not change my position for our support of Israel as long as there are entities expressing the desire to exterminate Jews.
